The Commentary Magazine Podcast

Episode Title: A Bridge Colby Too Far?
Date: December 8, 2025
Participants:

• John Podhoretz (Host, Editor, Commentary)
• Abe Greenwald (Executive Editor)
• Seth Mandel (Senior Editor)
• Christine Rosen (Columnist)
• Eliana Johnson (Washington Free Beacon Editor)

Brief Overview

In this episode, the Commentary team analyzes the new National Security Strategy released under Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, widely attributed to policy chief Elbridge ("Bridge") Colby. The panel discusses the policy’s intellectual roots, its rhetorical attacks on "neocons" and "nation builders," the Reagan legacy, the evolving Republican approach to foreign policy, and significant omissions—especially regarding China and Ukraine. The discussion concludes with an extended critique of recent, eye-opening coverage in the New York Times about the Biden administration's failures on immigration and the consequences for both parties.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Hegseth’s Speech & The National Security Strategy

• Hegseth’s speech and the National Security Strategy are seen as an articulation of Trump-era foreign policy, with an attempt to present Trump as the intellectual heir to Reagan.
• The document is "congruent" with the speech, both believed to be written or heavily influenced by Elbridge Colby ([05:35]-[06:06]).
  • Abe Greenwald: Approves much of the policy direction but is troubled by the ongoing habit of U.S. administrations to use national statements as platforms to denounce domestic opponents ([06:14]-[08:10]).

    "Every sort of policy rollout from every administration seems first and foremost aimed at other Americans with whom that administration disagrees with. And I think it broadcasts a terrible message, especially coming from the Defense Department to the rest of the world." ([06:14])

  • Eliana Johnson: Defends the speech’s coherence with where Trump stands, especially on criticizing neocons, defending actions against Iran and the Houthis, deterrence in Taiwan, and the reassertion of the Monroe Doctrine ([08:39]-[11:04]).

2. Critique: Domestic Attacks & Worldview

• Abe: Critiques the strategy’s obsession with "neocons" and nation builders, noting that this is unusual in global powers and projects weakness ([07:19]-[08:10]).
• John Podhoretz: Recalls Bush’s Second Inaugural Address and sees the attack on the "Bush doctrine" as a misunderstanding of historical American foreign policy, which has always been more pragmatic than rhetoric suggests ([12:25]-[15:04]).

3. China, Trade, and Economic Policy

• Christine Rosen: Alleges the strategy is alarmingly weak on China, omitting discussion of cybersecurity threats and prioritizing short-term trade over long-term security ([15:04]).

  "This document says almost nothing about Chinese cybersecurity infiltration...the lack of discussion of any of that in this strategy document strikes me as a worry about short term economic and trade negotiations at the expense of our long term security interests with China." ([15:04])

• Abe & Seth: Highlight China’s growing power via trade surplus and how U.S. tariff policy is incoherent, harming both domestic and allied economies ([16:44]-[17:24]).
• Seth Mandel: Notes the emphasis on rebuilding the U.S. defense industrial base as both an economic and strategic goal, but calls out the lack of promised numerical targets for U.S. defense spending ([18:55]).

4. Reagan, “Civilizational Confidence,” and the Right

• The document claims a "Trump Corollary" to the Monroe Doctrine, advocating for unapologetic U.S. and European civilizational self-confidence ([11:13], [26:56]).
  • John: Notes this as a new twist in Trump-era rhetoric and likens it to Jacksonian patriotism, but questions whether it’s substantive or just stylistic ([26:56]-[28:56]).
  • Christine: Critiques the explicit support for European far-right parties within the document, arguing this is counter to stated anti-interventionist aims and unnecessary ideological overreach ([28:56]).

5. Ukraine, Democratic Allies, and Geopolitical Omissions

• The panel points out the document’s soft treatment of Russia, minimal discussion of support for Ukraine, and kneejerk “branding” exercises with Reagan’s legacy rather than policy substance ([36:05]-[37:48]).
  • John: "Ukraine is showing European civilizational self confidence in its self defense way more than any other…If he wants Europe to follow a model…Ukraine is like, we are committing blood and treasure…"
  • Abe: Notes this lack of support breaks the Reagan-to-Trump continuity the speech and document claim ([36:05]-[36:27]).

6. Origins and Authorship of the Strategy

• While some attribute authorship to Michael Anton, John insists it sounds like Colby, noting Anton’s distinct writing style versus the "style-free" tone here ([41:02]-[41:32]).

7. Immigration: Media, Policy Failure, and Political Consequences

• The conversation shifts to a major New York Times piece chronicling Biden’s mishandling of immigration—acknowledging the problem, but making poor decisions out of fear of the left and advocacy groups ([45:55]-[52:05]).
  • Eliana: Points out how Democratic officials were only forced to address the problem after Republican governors bussed migrants to blue cities, puncturing the administration’s complacency ([45:55]-[47:42]).

    "The piece was amazing. What it made clear to me was that immigration…these decisions were made by the senior most members of the Biden administration…that they were warned in explicit terms what would happen and they ignored it." ([45:55])

  • Christine: Highlights the administration’s attempt to restrict refugee admissions—which was irrelevant to the border crisis—as performative politics for optics rather than solutions ([49:56]).
• The panel expresses frustration that media outlets ignored and even actively suppressed the immigration crisis story for institutional reasons, blinding both the left and vulnerable Democratic moderates to the problem until it was politically too late ([56:17]-[58:31]).
• Abe: Calls out media complicity in protecting Biden’s failures on both immigration and cognitive decline, with a warning for conservatives not to fall into analogous traps during a Republican administration ([56:17]-[60:58]).

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Abe Greenwald ([06:14]):
  "Every sort of policy rollout from every administration seems first and foremost aimed at other Americans with whom that administration disagrees… I think it broadcasts a terrible message, especially coming from the Defense Department to the rest of the world."

• Christine Rosen ([15:04]):
  "This document says almost nothing about Chinese cybersecurity infiltration… they are doing it as an aggressive enemy of this country… the lack of discussion in this strategy document strikes me as a worry about short term economic and trade negotiations at the expense of our long term security interests with China."

• John Podhoretz ([26:56]):
  "It says we need to go around the world unapologetic and unashamed about who we are, about what we stand for… Europe needs to restore its civilizational self-confidence and not go down the path in which Europe stops being Europe."

• Eliana Johnson ([45:55]):
  "The piece was amazing. What it made clear to me was that immigration…these decisions were made by the senior most members of the Biden administration…they were warned in explicit terms what would happen and they ignored it."

• Abe Greenwald ([56:17]):
  "This has to me the same slightly sickening quality that the stories of this is how Joe Biden's decline was protected for the past four years. You guys were in on it. Don't forget that. Not you, the Times, the media."

Timestamps for Key Segments

• National Security Strategy & Hegseth Speech: [03:33]–[15:04]
• China Strategy Critique: [15:04]–[17:24]
• Industrial Base and Defense Spending: [17:24]–[20:00]
• Soft Power, Monroe Doctrine, and ‘Civilizational Confidence’: [26:56]–[28:56]
• European Far Right & Ideology: [28:56]–[31:33]
• Ukraine, Russia, and Allies: [36:05]–[39:26]
• Strategy Authorship Debate: [41:02]–[41:32]
• Immigration & Media Failure (NYT Piece): [45:55]–[56:17]
• Media’s Role and Conservative Warnings: [56:17]–[60:58]

Tone & Language

• The episode’s tone blends exasperation, humor, and deep policy analysis. The hosts often self-deprecate and reference inside jokes ("Now it can be told" for NYT revelations; "President Corn Pop" for Biden).
• The language is direct, occasionally acerbic, and reflects the panel’s right-of-center, intellectually combative style.
• Dialogues are attributed and often peppered with asides and clarifications reflecting longstanding debates within conservative intellectual circles.

Summary Takeaways

• The new National Security Strategy is an attempt to define the next stage of Trump-era foreign policy, styled in old-school doctrine but shaped by the politics of resentment—against neocons, "nation builders," and the preceding Democratic consensus.
• The document presents an incomplete roadmap, strong on rhetoric about Western "confidence" but weak on clear commitments regarding defense spending, alliance management, and, notably, the threat from China.
• The Reagan legacy is invoked, but the substance is uneven, and the authors seem to miss the transatlantic and democratic unity Reagan cultivated.
• The immigration discussion shows how partisan and media blinders have real policy and political consequences—both for the Biden administration and for the future of conservative politics.
• Throughout, the panel cautions against overconfidence, epistemic closure, and the tendency of both left and right to ignore inconvenient realities until it’s too late.